Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

To Mask or not to two - Mask Megathread cont.

Options
1…274275277279280…289

Comments

  • Options
    #8282
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Here is what the verified HSE expert said on boards a few years back. Probably explains best why masks serve their purpose in a medical setting but have absolutely no worthwhile benefit in the community.


    Face Masks:

    A lot of conflicting things have been said about face masks. The bottom line is that most of the face masks people are purchasing aren’t of any use and even if they were members of the public don’t know how to use them appropriately in order to gain effective protection.

    For this reason I would say that buying face masks is ineffective UNLESS you have been advised on which ones to purchase and how to put them on, fit them and take them off. There is going to be a huge shortage of face masks for medical staff in Ireland soon.

    The only face masks which are worth getting are surgical masks or ones rated as either N95/FFP2 or N99/FFP3. Simply put these two ratings mean they stop 95 or 99% of particles above a certain size IF put on properly but almost certainly the vast majority of you with these masks aren’t getting any protection from them.

    So, now that I’ve told you that in all the panic you’ve probably bought masks which won’t screen out viruses AND even if they did you don’t know how to wear them properly so as to protect yourself AND even if you get that bit right the way you put them on and off will spread infection.



  • Options
    #8283
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131171#Comment_120131171

    Again you continue to deliberately misrepresent out of date information / out of context info in a misleading manner.

    That information relates to direct protection by the wearer from an infected person.

    Mask mandates were about masks as barriers on an infected person.

    You continually ignore this point when challenged on it.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #8284
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,482 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131171#Comment_120131171

    Ignore the mountains of evidence and continue living in your pandemic fantasy so.

    Is there a mask in the room with you right now?



  • Options
    #8285
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131188#Comment_120131188

    So masks let things in but know not to let them out... ?

    It's not outdated information. Masks haven't changed.



  • Options
    #8286
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131190#Comment_120131190

    Do you disagree with the expert?



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8287
    jackboy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,494 ✭✭✭jackboy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131171#Comment_120131171

    That’s probably from the time when the experts were asked to go on the media to say masks don’t work, as there was a shortage for healthcare workers.



  • Options
    #8288
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,482 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131249#Comment_120131249

    The scientific evidence doesn't match what the expert says, now, I'm sure if looked into, the context would mean that the expert wasn't saying that at all and that you're leaving out stuff to suit your fantasy, but based on the snippet you posted, I would disagree with the expert.

    Do you disagree with the mountains of scientific evidence?

    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131250#Comment_120131250

    The poster has spent almost 3 years getting everything wrong about the pandemic, it's highly unlikely that it will change now.



  • Options
    #8289
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120131248#Comment_120131248

    It is out dated information taken out of context.

    For one thing that was from a time when it was unclear how much spread was fomite / surfaces versus respiratory droplets. It over states the concern re touching masks risk. It is now established primary spread is respiratory.

    Surgical masks for example block both on the way in and out - but imperfectly. A health care worker giving close contact care to an infected person is still going to be at high risk of infection. That is reflected in the advice you quoted.

    Mask mandates were primarily about containing the droplets at source because eg surgical masks are more effective at blocking the larger droplets expelled rather than directly protecting against inhaling smaller particles.

    "Masks may be more effective as a 'source control' because they can prevent larger expelled droplets from evaporating into smaller droplets that can travel farther."

    https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent

    This study assesses the evidence for masks as PPE versus 'source control' along similar lines

    https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #8290
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,504 ✭✭✭✭elperello



    Our Constitution and our civil liberties are in good shape in Offaly and the other 25 counties.

    We are fortunate to live in one of the most stable democracies in the world.



  • Options
    #8291
    walus
    Registered Users Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭walus


    In this interview Dr.Margery Smelikinson and Dr. Leslie Bienen discuss efficacy of face mask:

    https://youtu.be/APGVQZdwBQc

    They are discussion several studies that prove and disprove the usefulness of masks in controlling the spread of covid -19.

    According to them, the more thorough studies that are based on randomised controlled trials did not find masks very effective in reducing transmission levels. They suggest that the media are cherry picking the low quality studies to promote masks and mask mandates.

    In one of the study they masked 6 year old and unmasked 5 year old school kids, and found no significant differences in covid transmission.

    ”Where’s the revolution? Come on, people you’re letting me down!”



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8292
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135401#Comment_120135401

    It's the same misrepresentation we've seen before such as the Danish study into e.g. cloth and surgical masks being worn as PPE.

    So they are deliberately misrepresenting that study if they are using it to argue against mask mandates when the study expressly declared it could not be used to make any such conclusions.

    If they are talking about "controlling the spread" and referencing that study, they are being entirely dishonest.

    They talk about flu, so if they are referencing studies into flu and masks, they are almost certainly referring to the study in the use of cloth masks as PPE by healthcare workers. Again, not relevant to mask mandates.

    And they talk about RSV, when it is known that RSV particles are smaller than covid particles and so most masks will not be as effective against it.

    I'd like to see the real details of this school study, they use the phrase "voodoo doll of masking", so I don't take a single thing they say as being reliable on face value.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #8293
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135544#Comment_120135544

    So you disagree with a scientist of infectious diseases who specialises in COVID and flu?



  • Options
    #8294
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135609#Comment_120135609

    They are using phrases like voodoo doll and citing studies which explicitly stated they should not be using to draw conclusions re mask mandates.

    I dont just merely disagree with them. They are engaged in deliberate misrepresentation. They are not giving an honest presentation.

    Their opinions are contrary to the advice of every major health authority in the world. So if you are swayed by credentials their opinions are contrary to the scientific consensus.

    Oh and one of them is a vet.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #8295
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135627#Comment_120135627

    She is a scientist of infectious diseases who specialises in COVID.

    Any conspiracies as to why she'd engage in misrepresentation?

    By the way, you seem to use the word "misrepresentation" on a daily basis when people have different opinions.


    Perhaps you should reach out to this infectious disease scientist and tell her that you know more.



  • Options
    #8296
    odyssey06
    Registered Users Posts: 28,424 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135658#Comment_120135658

    Citing the danish study as evidence versus mask mandates when it did not study them is misrepresentation. To cite it and not qualify your remarks are clearly not the actions of someone giving an honest fair balanced assessment of the evidence. It is not simply a difference of opinion. I dont know more but I know a dishonest presentation when I see one.

    I have no idea what her agenda is but given that the CDC, WHO, ECDC are stacked with infectious disease specialists and it is their advice re masks that was followed... if you are getting into an argument from authority you have lost in a landslide. And one of them is a vet ffs!

    So clearly in terms of collective expertise the CDC etc know more and that is who I rely on for subject matter expertise.

    So if you still somehow believe all of those authorities are wrong and this one specialist is right then you are the one who will have to resort to conspiracies.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Options
    #8297
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,482 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135609#Comment_120135609

    You keep asking this question of various people while living in a fantasy land ignoring and running away continually from the mountains of evidence available.

    If an expert is disagreeing with mountains of evidence, then they need to bring their own backed evidence instead, to save you the trouble of asking stupid questions in the future, people will disagree with them and they will be putting their "expert" credentials at risk.

    The examples you've been cheerleading are either misrepresenting evidence or you continually misrepresent what they say (pathetically referring to comments from the beginning of the pandemic).

    I posted multiple studies showing how masks work unequivocally, peer reviewed and backed by numerous experts, do you disagree with them the mountains of evidence?



  • Options
    #8298
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135809#Comment_120135809

    The reason I am forcing yous to admit yous disagree with experts is because the pro side frequently say to listen to the experts. It seems that only counts when it's the experts who agree with you though which is interesting.

    I'm happy to listen to experts on both sides but a lot of those cheerleading for masks have ass covering agendas.

    There are lots of experts and studies out there against masks. I haven't seen anything convincing that cloth masks stuffed in someone's pocket for a week are in any way effective against respiratory illnesses.

    I tend to focus more on data. And there is nothing there to suggest mask mandates reduced cases or deaths to any meaningful extent.


    It's all in the past now anyways. We've had no mandate for almost a year and everything is grand. That should mean we'll never see those silly things mandated again.



  • Options
    #8299
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,482 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120136006#Comment_120136006

    That's not what you've been doing though for the past 3 years, to claim otherwise is quite funny.

    Do you disagree with the mountains of evidence provided in multiple studies?



  • Options
    #8300
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120136209#Comment_120136209

    Do you disagree with the mountains of evidence against masks?

    If they are so effective, why does the government no longer mandate them?

    Hospitals are under pressure every year. Surely it would be a dream come true if they've found a solution?



  • Options
    #8301
    xhomelezz
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭xhomelezz


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120129975#Comment_120129975

    He posts that argument every few weeks and in the meantime Kirk jumps in with his genuine question

    " Do you think mask mandate is on the way? "

    I guess there's a pattern somewhere..



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8302
    xhomelezz
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭xhomelezz


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120135401#Comment_120135401

    They are discussion several studies that prove and disprove the usefulness of masks in controlling the spread of covid -19.

    That's not a discussion in that video. It's made for a purpose. In case you've missed it.



  • Options
    #8303
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,482 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120136232#Comment_120136232

    I asked you about the studies, you have posted out of context waffle and cranks and refuse to engage on the studies posted. As said, pretty pathetic.



  • Options
    #8304
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,157 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Anyone would think it was a gas mask these lads had to wear!!



  • Options
    #8305
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137107#Comment_120137107

    I've looked at the studies on both sides and carefully analysed the global data.

    Mask studies are very much in their infancy. I haven't seen any that actually capture a real life scenario such as only wearing the same cloth mask for a week and only on public transport etc

    You could say they are a misrepresentation.

    I see nothing in the data to suggest that mask mandates had any meaningful impact on cases or deaths. If they were so useful, it would be simple to see but it isn't.


    If our government really thought that wearing a mask would keep the hospitals quiet all winter/year, why don't they just mandate them now?



  • Options
    #8306
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137310#Comment_120137310

    Nobody has to wear a mask outside healthcare.



  • Options
    #8307
    KanyeSouthEast
    Registered Users Posts: 915 ✭✭✭KanyeSouthEast


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137419#Comment_120137419

    And judging by the amount of people who do in day to day life nobody wants to! Gas mask or not it’s obvious that people either don’t want to. don’t believe in their effectiveness or have moved on to accepting the risk associated with covid.



  • Options
    #8308
    walus
    Registered Users Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭walus


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137418#Comment_120137418

    The scientific consensus is by no means set on the efficacy of masks. There are studies that are proving as well as disproving their usefulness. The fact that this debate is ongoing for 3 years now is in itself a proof of that.

    If we look at the science on the harm caused by smoking, we can say that a scientific consensus has been established over the years and the scientific community is in agreement as to how harmful to a human health smoking is. There are no new publications that even attempt to disprove that. Smoking causes harm - it is a fact.

    The same cannot be said about the masks, and I cannot see how the governments can issue masks mandates based on the science that did not fully go through its natural course of research, discourse and open debate. Until that happens and instead of an illusion of science we truly have a solid scientific consensus, mask mandates cannot be justified. Period.

    Recommendation to wear masks is one thing, mandating them is simply wrong.

    Post edited by walus on

    ”Where’s the revolution? Come on, people you’re letting me down!”



  • Options
    #8309
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,087 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    In one of the study they masked 6 year old and unmasked 5 year old school kids, and found no significant differences in covid transmission.


    I'm guessing you've never been around 5 or 6 year old kids? There is absolutely no way that the wearing of a mask by the kids, or not, had any bearing on the study. Unless the kids were isolated in individual space suits that they couldn't get out of then the masks will have made as much difference as the colour of the socks they were wearing. That is assuming they were studying in some kind of school setting.


    If they were studying kids during non school time activities and following their parents around the shops then I'm not sure what they were looking for as if the kids were wearing masks or not wasn't for their benefit, it was for others they might encounter on their travels who weren't being studied.



  • Options
    #8310
    xhomelezz
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭xhomelezz


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137418#Comment_120137418

    I've looked at the studies on both sides and carefully analysed the global data.

    Would there be any chance to explain and show how did you do it?



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8311
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120137631#Comment_120137631

    Lots of research. Feel free to do it.



Advertisement